 Poster: A snowHead
|
No Megamum, you et al won. Excelsior. 
BTW, seeing that S&R are now not selling the box, shouldn't they be offered the same courtesy as was offered to Bartlett and their name removed from the thread?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Richard_Sideways, It was never a case of 'winning' for me, I don't like the fact that whatever sport I deal in, the safety gear that seems sensible to own is often priced above what many are willing to pay for it. If someone had come to the market with something that was in the right price range and that stood up to my personal information gathering exercise, I would have been only too pleased to have purchased it. In fact I gave a fair amount of consideration to buying these, and getting a full bown device for myself. However, I then looked at things and considered what I thought I needed them for and decided that they were a poor investment as they have a limited lifespan with kids that will only ever want to explore more of the mountain in the future, so I didn't get them.
I have a great deal of time for anyone that wants to bring affordable safety gear (that works!!!) to any sport. CSS have the right idea, i.e. 'affordability', in that respect, what I think is missing from the market is a device that would let parent keep tabs on very young snow users in busy resorts. I could see the adaption of the snowbe to this market perhaps as a two part parent/child kit with a transmitting device and a receiving partner on a wavelength that could be dialled in for the particular set - rather like different frequencies of radios. The guy is obviously OK with electronics I'm sure the device could be adapted into something that would have use, if not for avalanche protection.
Yes, I agree that the S&R should probably be removed if they have agreed to stop the sale too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
To be honest I can't help thinking that the emotional investment spent here would be better applied to encouraging recreational users of beacons with a search function get out, train and practice with them. Trad beacons with no training probably are not much more use for most people that the Cambridge device in an avalanche accident.
How many people spend the first couple of hours of their holiday refreshing beacon search in case they go off piste ? Not many I bet, so I wonder how much likely a successful rescue is when skiing with equally untrained friends.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
AndAnotherThing.., and you think that some of the people who have posted in a negative manner don't do that?
I do each year before going off-piste, and I am pretty sure Fatbob and Haggis Trap do rather more.
But - moving away from being snide about the behaviour of people posting here - it is a very good point. And the idea that any skiing safety kit doesn't involve an opportunity cost in time and money to be of any use is totally bogus. The device as it is being pimped by CSS is sold on scare tactics, and suggests risk can be mitigated by money alone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Megamum, thanks again for your comments. We have not gone anywhere and are considering all the points made - I think that we have answered many of the questions as well as we can and made our points about the product and its purpose. Clearly not everyone agrees with what we have said but we are considering all the comments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| AndAnotherThing.. wrote: |
How many people spend the first couple of hours of their holiday refreshing beacon search in case they go off piste ? Not many I bet, so I wonder how much likely a successful rescue is when skiing with equally untrained friends. |
I don't think anyone, myself included, does as much as they should, to be at truly competent levels including e.g. strategic shovelling. I've seen some exercises which attempt to replicate stress by having a patroller yell constantly from 2 ft away during the search process to unbalance the user. But I don't think the points are unrelated - having a transceiver at least allows one to do some practice, get familiar with it, be aware of limitations, and having made the investment one is encouraged to think more widely about the subject, train, read, observe in the field.
This device is passive, there is no practice you could do, even if motivated and accordingly the impetus to be be aware about your environment is not there. I'd probably be happy if they were delivered as part of a avalanche and on piste safety training because at least something positive would accompany them (& perhaps the users might understand the significant limitations of always relying on others to assume things are "safe").
The fact that the device comes from someone who admits to no avalanche training himself is I think a bit scary. No, doing bill big dangly bits courses shouldn't be a prerequisite for access to equipment but if someone is deliberately starting a business in the area I'd hope that they were at least moderately educated.
& education isn't everything, as any "expert" will tell you science is only part of the equation, heuristics is a major problem. There are no pat answers in this area and first and foremost people need to be humble and prepared to act conservatively and particularly not just go with the crowd. In this respect CSS seems to be trying to do the right thing, IMO his first product is a dud but maybe his second will be better and a positive step forward.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seems like it's all splitting hairs, I don't see the difference between this device and any other device that the owner hasn't a clue how to use, both are in essence exactly the same product in that situation.
Yes I realise that for other devices the owner can learn to use them and should learn to use them but until there is some sort of compulsory testing in shops before they are allowed to be purchased thats idealistic.
Although I agree with the point that there really isn't a need for such a device as the risk is so small, I also think peoples level of risk aversion varies and there is all sorts of safety equipment/devices out there for all manner of things that most would think are pointless but to someone else they are considered necessary. To that person even if the odds of dieing in an on piste avalanche were 1 in a hundred million and this device merely reduced those odds to 1 in 99,999,999 that might seem worth it. It sounds feasible that someone at some point could benefit from such a device, having said that someone at some point could benefit from carrying a can of baked beans with them when skiing, each to their own.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| stoat of the dead wrote: |
| AndAnotherThing.., and you think that some of the people who have posted in a negative manner don't do that? |
No.
However I do suspect that you (and I) are almost certainly in the minority of the skiing population who ski with a beeper.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DT68, I wasn't dismissive of soulskier's views. It appeared to me that he/she was banging the same drum as cambridgeski, ignoring all the negative (and rightly so) views held on this device. It was that that made me think that soulskier might have been related to, married to, in business with or banging cambridgeski
Oh and it was a bit TIC
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Just a sec, if you were trained that in the event of any kind of avalanche search anywhere near your location you switch it off, wouldn't that be the same as searchers switching to "find" instead of transmit? As long as this important lesson is made clear then I don't see much issue - if nothing else because there could be plenty of others skiing down the same piste with a transceiver switched on that didn't realise an avalanche search was going on.
Have we covered that already? If not, then all it needs is a bit of instruction for anyone buying the devices. I have to say I'd have more faith in a smaller quality ski shop in providing that advice than the big chains who may have staff that don't even ski in the shop, but it seems pretty straightforward.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Camisme wrote: |
| Seems like it's all splitting hairs, I don't see the difference between this device and any other device that the owner hasn't a clue how to use, both are in essence exactly the same product in that situation. |
The difference is, with a transceiver, the owner can hand it to someone who does know how to use it, which is not totally impossible considering the environment it's aimed at.
As I said earlier, I've got stuff in my first aid kit that I'd not use and are beyond my knowledge, but I'd be glad to hand it to someone who did know how to use it and maybe it could make a difference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But isn't that just an argument for everyone having to wear a transceiver as opposed to an argument against this product?
which then defeats all the points around cost (as more expensive) and people not switching them off when a search is taking place (more people with them)
I'm not saying it's a good product and everyone should buy one, but if it is just used as intended (young kids on piste or even as a training tool to allow someone to practice searches) then i don't think it's bad, unnecessary - yes (in the young kids case, probably necessary for the training route option).
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| feef wrote: |
The difference is, with a transceiver, the owner can hand it to someone who does know how to use it, which is not totally impossible considering the environment it's aimed at.
|
which in itself is a bad idea... What if there is another slide?
Didn't you wonder why it automatically turns itself back to transmit mode?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Wow there is so much useless tat in the world what makes this so special it needs a super crusade..
People are capable of deciding what suits their own needs and if they choose to buy this then go off piste then that's their own stupid choice if they have not done the proper research again that is their fault and they will suffer the consequences.
What about the really important fact that people can buy a transceiver and know nothing about using it 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
geeo, nothings special about it in comparison with other tat, it's just been bought to everyones attention and is new enough in the market and has the interest of the manufacturer that some stern complaining about the shortcomings might have some effect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
telling me i shouldn't buy something because you and others have decided it's worthless comes across as totally pompous and thats being nice.. highliting it's shortcomings is fair enough, slating vendors who choose to sell it seems OTT i'm an adult i can buy wtf i like
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
geeo, but I have only highlighted its short comings so your other points don't bare any relevance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| stuarth wrote: |
| feef wrote: |
The difference is, with a transceiver, the owner can hand it to someone who does know how to use it, which is not totally impossible considering the environment it's aimed at.
|
which in itself is a bad idea... What if there is another slide?
Didn't you wonder why it automatically turns itself back to transmit mode? |
I'm not going to rise... Your bait is stale
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Quote: |
geeo, but I have only highlighted its short comings so your other points don't bare any relevance.
|
ok you may only have highlighted it's shortcomings but the tone of the thread is they are no good no one should buy them and these shops are demons for allowing that to happen to the unsuspecting idiots. i said you as i was replying to 'you' but to be honest i was just taking your post along with all the others and the general tone of disgust at this.
To be clear i think it's useless and i dont see it having any market people buy transceivers to go off piste and thats what they were made for, no one thinks this is any use of piste but if they decide it's good enough then thats up to them, and if they want it to be safe on piste again it's up to them even if the chance is 0.0001% of being in a slide, i wont be skiing with anyone using one as i doubt anyone here would either but i wont tell other people what they should or shouldn't buy.
Plenty of folks have transceivers and dont practise but you wouldn't test anyone who pulled one out at the start of a tour would you, have you never done group touring with strangers or been on guided off piste to me thats as dangerous as a transmit only device but it's ok if you know everyone has one right? you are sure to be dug out..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
geeo, I think you might want to chill out a bit. As someone who thinks its a useless product do you think it ethical to sell something useless to the ignorant? Most retailers do tend to want to be seen as actually acting with responsibility towards their customers. Particularly specialists who trade on their domain knowledge. Especially when selling said product requires scaremongering about risk.
Touring with strangers is a completely different issue and I'd fully agree that attitudes towards training with transceivers often leave a lot to be desired. As far as I can see problems in this area have the square root of  all to do with the suitability to task of this product and seem to have been put out as a smoke screen to deflect. Whataboutery essentially.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
chill out lol that's funny 
it's no more unethical to sell that to someone as it is a trasnceiver with no training or a pair of ski boots 2 sizes too big or a skis that are no use for their victim, wheres the difference? Please dont tell me it's a safety issue
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| meh wrote: |
| geeo, I think you might want to chill out a bit. As someone who thinks its a useless product do you think it ethical to sell something useless to the ignorant? |
To be fair, that does seem to be the basis of the entire financial services industry...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Something else has just occurred to me. CSS freely admit that they would intend to rely on the arrival of professional help with receivers to search for someone buried with their device. It just occurs that if there was an on-piste avalanche wouldn't teams arrive with recco detectors? I know they are more specialised kit, but surely an avalanche would trigger its deployment? In that instance wouldn't a recco reflector be as worthwhile as a snowbe and for far less cost? Surely the main advantage a proper two way transciever has is in potential speed of deployment if they can all receive? If you have to wait for the pro teams to arrive, and if I make the assumption that they carry a recco detector when they arrive surely you would be just as well off carrying a recco reflector as wearing a snowbe? Is there any advantage of a snowbe over a recco?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| geeo wrote: |
ok you may only have highlighted it's shortcomings but the tone of the thread is they are no good no one should buy them and these shops are demons for allowing that to happen to the unsuspecting idiots |
Uhhhmmm.... clearly only an unsuspecting & misinformed idiot would have bought this device from S&R... 
Personally I would like to think that the UKs largest ski store would play a role in educating its customers and public about avalanche risk & safety equipment ? (i,e beacon, shovel + probe). This device clearly did not fit that remit. If anyone is still stupid enough to want a 'transmit only' beacon then be my guest : you know where to get them...
Last edited by snowHeads are a friendly bunch. on Wed 27-03-13 23:24; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
Megamum, Recco failed dismally because although the reflectors were cheap enough to be indiscriminately attached to clthing, the detectorsvwere so expensive few resorts bought them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm with geeo on this 100%. Some posts on this thread come across as pretty self righteous. If CSS wants to make money out of stupid people then good luck to him - he won't be the first or the last. There are plenty of examples of products which are not fit for purpose or which are dangerous when the manufacturer's usage instructions are ignored. Two years ago I witnessed an instructor handing out transceivers to a group of intermediates without shovels or probes or any instruction on how to use them to allow them to ski "just off piste" - surely much the same principle as having a transmit only beacon? I can't see a huge market for this product, wouldn't buy one and wouldn't ski off piste with someone who uses one but I wouldn't stop anyone from having the choice of buying one if they wished to. How about a campaign against plastic bladed shovels, 1.5m probes or the new smartphone avalanche apps that are currently being promoted on Chamonet etc...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Megamum wrote: |
| Something else has just occurred to me. CSS freely admit that they would intend to rely on the arrival of professional help with receivers to search for someone buried with their device. It just occurs that if there was an on-piste avalanche wouldn't teams arrive with recco detectors? I know they are more specialised kit, but surely an avalanche would trigger its deployment? In that instance wouldn't a recco reflector be as worthwhile as a snowbe and for far less cost? Surely the main advantage a proper two way transciever has is in potential speed of deployment if they can all receive? If you have to wait for the pro teams to arrive, and if I make the assumption that they carry a recco detector when they arrive surely you would be just as well off carrying a recco reflector as wearing a snowbe? Is there any advantage of a snowbe over a recco? |
I asked CCS this very question several pages back. For it's stated purpose, how is this product any different from Recco, which is sold at a much lower cost to the consumer.
CCS has yet to answer this question.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| under a new name wrote: |
| Megamum, Recco failed dismally because although the reflectors were cheap enough to be indiscriminately attached to clthing, the detectorsvwere so expensive few resorts bought them. |
I'm by no means an expert here, but at least according to Recco's website, quite a long list of resorts seem to be equipped.
http://www.recco.com/resorts-operations/all-recco-resorts
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| under a new name wrote: |
| Megamum, Recco failed dismally because although the reflectors were cheap enough to be indiscriminately attached to clthing, the detectorsvwere so expensive few resorts bought them. |
If I recall correctly they were also pretty large and heavy, but I get the feeling this may have changed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
geeo, TomDeSavoie, good to see the Tories are still skiing. As long as you are flogging stuff you have no responsibility. As soon as you question the people flogging crap you are worse than Hitler.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
AndAnotherThing.., it might be interesting to find out. As I get the impression that there are already thousands of reccos on the slopes and if the resorts already have the kit on hand, they are probably as much use as a snowbe in an on-piste avalanche, esp. if you have to wait for them to arrive on the scene as css expects to be the case with a snowbe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
J9, Dangerous until and unless some proper independent avalanche specialists test it thoroughly. What is the point if it isn't to the standard of a full replacement for existing transceivers - to equip the gullible or naive with something that "might" work to a lower standard? Might just wipe out CSS if parents are worried about kids on piste though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
As long as you are flogging stuff you have no responsibility
|
That seemed to be the basis for the Icelandic banking system 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
geeo, I totally get the "god made sheep to be shorn" argument. But free speech means we get to criticise the scare-mongering muppet who is pimping this. I still believe that people may die as a result of such a device being available.
Advertising is still meant to be Honest, Decent Legal and Truthful... And I do expect more of shops and organisations selling medicines and safety gear making claims for safety or health, than I do for cosmetics manufacturers and second-hand car dealers.
Forums have opinions posted. Some may seem pompous and self-righteous to you, others may be relaxed about morality, integrity and happy to see others ripped off to some of the rest of us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
TomDeSavoie, indeed... Yet strangely the British public belatedly decided it deserved financial protection from that, despite the obvious safety issues to many of us.
I hope CSS has good public liability insurance...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Agreeing completely with stoat of the dead, the right of manufacturers to sell things in no way invalidates the rights of others to protest about the quality and appropriateness of the Krapp being sold.
A free market also consists of the right to condemn useless rubbish.Consumers are quite entitled to protect each other
No one defending the device has picked up at all on feefs point on the previous page about it not actually having been tested in cold wet turbulent conditions which may affect its use for the rather dubious benefits for which it is being sold.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
If your product is worth selling then it should stand up to scrutiny. There is a pool of knowledge and opinion here that you may as well take advantage off, esp. as by your admission you don't have a background in avalanche 'know-how' - you seem to agree as you indicate that you are 'considering the comments' 
